Steve’s barn burned down. Julie, his wife, called the insurance company and said, “We had that barn insured for fifty thousand dollars, and I want my money.”
“Whoa there, just a minute, Julie, it doesn’t work like that. We will assess the value of the barn and provide you with a new one of comparable worth,” the agent replied.
Julie, after a pause, said, “Well, in that case, I’d like to cancel the policy on my husband.”
At the conclusion of this week’s portion, Shoftim, the Torah states the following law: "When a corpse is found fallen in the field, and it is not known who the murderer is, your elders and judges must go out and measure the distance to the closest city," where we assume the victim was last before his murder. The Talmud explains that a delegation of five members of the Jewish Supreme Court in Jerusalem would come to the field where the victim was discovered and make the measurements to the closest city.
Following this, the elders of that city situated closest to the corpse,
were obliged to go out and bring a heifer as an atonement for the slain
man's blood.
The elders of the city would then declare, "Our hands
have not spilled this blood and our eyes have not witnessed it."
Then the priests who accompanied the elders in the ritual would
beseech G-d, saying, "Forgive your people ... do not allow the guilt for
innocent blood to remain with your people, Israel."
The Torah concludes by saying that "The blood shall thus be atoned for. You shall thus rid yourself of the guilt of innocent blood in your midst,
since you will have done that which is morally right in G-d's eyes."
Yet the placing of this law in the Torah is strange. Immediately preceding this law are the directives concerning war: "When you go out to war against your enemy..."
Why was the section of the calf brought as atonement in a case of a person murdered, and the killer is unknown, placed right in the middle of the two biblical sections dealing with combat? Obviously, this law concerning a lonely slain victim has nothing to do with times of war.
There is a profound message in the juxtaposition of this portion between the two sections in Torah that deal with war.
In times of war, life becomes incredibly cheap. In times of war, people are dying, left and right: men, women, children, soldiers, non-soldiers. The value of life is reduced to zero.
My grandfather once described to me the streets of Leningrad during the Second World War, when hunger claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands. The streets were laden with corpses, of young and old, men and women. As you walked the streets, you did not even bother to notice them, never mind bury them.
For soldiers in battle, who see both their comrades and their enemies falling all around them, life can become insignificant.
Comes the Torah and says that regardless of the type of situation one finds himself in, never minimize the importance of even a single human being. There can be war ravaging all around, yet the value of even a life remains supreme. Even the death of one lonely human being requires an atonement from an entire city, even if they were not directly involved, and the highest court in Jerusalem must come down to make the measurements. That is why the Torah places this law about the solitary slain victim in between the portions of going out to war: Regardless of what swirls around you, war on the right and war on the left, never take lightly even a single human life.
This may be why providence had it that Jacob would teach this law to Joseph right before his descent into Egypt.
Joseph would become the Prime Minister of the country, but was threatened by a devastating famine. Lest Joseph think that one life is not so important, Jacob’s final message to him was that for one life, hell must break loose. Rulers who are in charge of nations of millions and millions of people, especially in times of famine and war, have to be taught the lesson of the importance of a single human life.
This was also critical for Joseph himself. He would end up as a lonely lad, a single Jew, in the “super-power” of the time. It would be natural and easy for him to be swallowed up and lose his identity, his sense of self, his dignity as a scion of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The moral depravity of Egypt would naturally consume him.
What gave him the fortitude to withstand the pressures? The “last lecture” of his father, indicating the incredible value of a solitary life and its centrality to the entire nation and the entire land. Joseph never forgot this lesson and never forfeited his identity as a member of the Covenant.
The story is told that, before Mao-Tse-Tung (1893-1976), the founder and leader of the "People's Republic of China," brought the Revolution to China and installed the Communist system there, he was warned that millions of Chinese could starve until they got things working properly.
To which Mao responded, "If I have to lose 100 million Chinese peasants for the revolution, then it's worth it."
Indeed, during his leadership, from 1949 to 1976, it is estimated that 70 million of his own people perished!
This is one type of leader: one who can give up 100 million people, as long as he gets his goals accomplished. Joseph was taught a very different message: One must do all to save even a single life, even during extremely challenging times.
Contrast Mao-Tse-Tung, if you may, with a contemporary of his, Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik (1853-1918), the Rabbi of the Lithuanian city of Brisk and one of the great sages of the last generation, via an incident related by his grandson, Rabbi Aharon Soloveitchik (1917-2001, the dean of the Brisk Yeshiva in Chicago.
In the year 1905, when Rabbi Chaim Brisker was the Rabbi in Brisk, there was a young Jewish Bundist. In that period, there were many different philosophies and movements that captured the minds of numerous young Jews. The Bundists—a powerful Jewish movement, founded in 1897, fighting for Socialism and substituting Judaism for Karl Marx’s ideas of economic equality—attracted the hearts of myriads of Jews. This fellow was a fierce Bundist who rejected everything related to Judaism. Whenever he would see Rabbi Chaim Brisker pass him in the street on Shabbat, he used to go out of his way to light up a cigarette.
One day, this young Bundist, who naturally despised the system of monarchy, took a portrait of Czar Nicholas—the last Czar of Russia, dethroned during the Bolshevik revolution in 1917—and shot a bullet through the portrait. Czarist Russia did not know from Berkley and Columbia; the idea of freedom of expression was nonexistent. The young Jewish Bundist was arrested, brought to the local governor and was sentenced to execution for sedition and treason. The arrest took place right before Rosh Hashanah, and the execution was scheduled for two weeks later, the day before Sukkot.
During those days in Russia, bribery performed wonders. Treason was, of course, unforgivable, unless money was handed over to the right places... Rabbi Chaim Brisker sent to inquire how much the governor would want to let the Bundist free. The answer was: 5000 rubles for this Jew.
Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik gathered the leaders of the community of Brisk and told them they were obligated to raise the money to save this Jewish boy. Some members of the community were taken aback. They told their Rabbi that it states explicitly in the Torah in this week’s portion exactly the opposite of what he is advising them to do. They quoted the verse: "And you shall eradicate the evil from your midst." What could be a bigger fulfillment of this Biblical command, they asked, than letting this Bundist go? After all, he was a terrible troublemaker and did everything he could to undermine Judaism in his city; should they really intervene?
They were also shocked at who was demanding this of them: none other than the Rabbi, whose authority this Bundist continuously undermined. Rabbi Chaim told them that they misinterpreted the verse. The context of the verse is crucial. Immediately before this sentence, we read: "By the word of two witnesses or three witnesses shall the condemned person be put to death; he shall not be put to death by the word of a single witness". The Torah requires a very rigorous process to allow for the death penalty. There must be testimony by witnesses. There must be deliberation and ruling by a Jewish court. The circumstances of the human being who sinned must be thoroughly investigated. To take the words "eradicate evil from your midst" as carte blanche to say that we can get rid of every undesirable character in the city is a horrific misrepresentation of Torah law. Rabbi Chaim insisted that the community raise the money to free the young man.
This happened, as you recall, right before Rosh Hashanah. The community, struggling even in good days to support its many needy, did not come up with the money.
The eve of Yom Kippur arrived. Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik announced that the synagogue would not be opened for Kol Nidre, the holiest prayer of the year, until the full amount of the ransom was raised. What is more, no one would be allowed into the synagogue on all of Yom Kippur until the money was raised. The saving of a Jewish life is more important than the observance of Yom Kippur.
The community had no choice. They went and raised the money, presented the funds to the governor, and freed the Bundist one half hour before sunset on the eve of Yom Kippur. Rabbi Chaim and the other people involved in this effort did not have time to have their pre-fast meal that year. They went straight from the governor's office to Kol Nidre! Rabbi Chaim Brisker was known for his zealotry concerning the scrupulous observance of Jewish law. But his greatest zealotry was for the Talmudic teaching that "whoever saves a single soul is as if he saved the whole world." We see this contrast of attitudes to this very day.
On June 25, 2006, a 19-year-old soldier, Gilad Shalit, was kidnapped by Hamas terrorists. Hamas wants 1500 terrorists with blood on their hands released from Israeli jails in exchange for Gilad Shalit. As usual, the house of Israel is divided, same as we see now for the hostages in Gaza, and it is a heart-wrenching argument. Over the past 30 years, Israel released more than 7,000 terrorists for... 19 soldiers. Should Israel continue on this path? Many say, bring him back for any price; he is our child, how can we allow him to languish in the hands of Hamas? Others argue that if Israel caves in, it will only motivate Hamas to abduct more Israeli soldiers and secure the release of more terrorists. Plus, it would put 1500 terrorists on the street plotting more Jewish deaths. As we know now that the leadership of Hamas, who planned and implemented the October 7, were the terrorists that Israel released for Gilad Shalit...
Hamas is aware of this unique Jewish “weakness.” If Israel were to tell Hamas, “One for one,” we release one imprisoned Hamasnik in exchange for Gilad Shalit, Hamas would not even consider it; it would be considered a joke. Why? What is one life for them? But for Israel, for the Jews, a single life has endless value. Gilad Shalit is priceless. Life cannot even be evaluated in terms of money. Hamas is aware of this Jewish conviction and hence the value in objecting to a Jewish life and holding it for ransom. This is what generates the bitter argument among Israelis now: do we give in to all their demands just to save these hostages, or must we think about the many future lives which may be endangered?
The late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir once captured the contrast dramatically: “Peace will come when the Arabs start loving their children more than they hate ours.”
In the film "Judgment at Nuremberg," American judge Dan Haywood sentences Ernst Janning, an important legal figure in Germany even before the rise of Hitler, to life in prison for condemning an innocent Jewish doctor to death in 1935. Janning pleads to Haywood that he was unaware of the magnitude of the Nazi horror and that he would have never assisted Hitler had he known what the monster was scheming.
"Those people, those millions of people," Janning begged for his freedom, "I never knew it would come to that. You must believe it."
To which Judge Haywood replied: "It came to that the first time you sentenced a man to death you knew to be innocent."
The moment a single life loses its absolute value, a thousand lives, even
a million lives, are ultimately not of value; they are merely more choking numbers. This message was never forgotten by the Jewish people, even during the most terrible times when life became worthless to so many cultures and nations. May G-d bless our soldiers and hostages will come home very soon, and a real peace will be in Israel.
Shabbat Shalom and Shana Tova,
Rabbi Yoseph Geisinsky
Natasha Thompson wrote...